When a prime minister tells the public that too many people have stopped taking responsibility for their own lives, something is going wrong. At best it signals a prime minister who does not quite have his finger on the pulse. At worst it suggests a leader who is becoming impatient with the voters for failing to get his self-evidently obvious message. Yesterday, David Cameron yet again relaunched his "big society" project and gave the impression that the idea's failure to catch fire was the public's fault rather than Mr Cameron's own. The big society was his passion, he insisted, so he was going to go on about it until it succeeds. Mr Cameron did not actually tell us to pull our socks up. But he got dangerously close to it.

All prime ministers get this way if they do not watch out – and it is almost invariably a bad sign. Gordon Brown told us to try harder to be more British. Tony Blair insisted we should wake up to the threats from which he promised to protect us. John Major exhorted us to all get back to basics. Margaret Thatcher lectured us to stop drooling and drivelling about how much we care about others. In each case, the prime ministers sent a message that they were on a different wavelength from the public. In Mr Cameron's case, the message is that he just doesn't understand where the rest of us are. For a man with his background and his privileges, this is dangerous stuff.

In principle, there is not just nothing wrong with the big society; there is lots right with it. Citizens should have a sense of solidarity with each other. They should give something of themselves to their neighbourhood and their community. They shouldn't expect the state, especially the central state, to provide them with their goods and jobs in all circumstances. They should not pass by on the other side. They have responsibilities as well as rights. They should give what they can as well as take what they need. Bottom up is frequently better than top down. Small is often better than large. Local can be preferable to national or international. Every political party – Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Labour, too – has this instinct and tradition in its history and its DNA.

What is more, Britain already is that kind of society. Solidarity, community and small platoons are indeed under attack in many ways, not least from globalisation, information technology and multiculturalism, all of which pose challenges as well as delivering immense benefits. But helping out, volunteerism, charity and self-help are not exactly non-existent in modern Britain. All kinds of intermediate bodies thrive, from trade unions, faith and parents' groups to not-for-profits, fund-raisers and community campaigns. Some are not what they once were. Others have never had it so good. Of course more could be done and there are pressing needs to be addressed. But it is nonsense to pretend everything is broken – as well as an insult to the millions who already do so much amid such stressed and busy lives.

Ed Miliband is wrong to claim that the big society is merely a cloak for reducing the state. But Mr Cameron is wrong to provide him with the opportunity to allege it. The truth is that asking individuals to do a bit more and the state to do a bit less is a philosophy for optimistic and prosperous times. It makes far less sense when times are insecure and people have such pressing anxieties and needs. These are times when the state, though constrained and short of resources, is needed more than ever by many. It is deeply unfair to the richness of the ideas that animate the big society to pretend it is nothing but a smokescreen for the dismantling of the state. The time for the big society will come. But that time is not now, not in this way, not on the threshold of the cuts that are due to be inflicted and felt at the end of March. The big society is a potentially important idea. But Mr Cameron has only himself to blame if people conclude that he is up to no good with it.